The World Cup Is Over. Your Most Important Review Is Just Beginning.
EPIC’s senior consultant Marko Jenkins considers what this year’s World Cup has left behind in terms of something that runs deeper than compliance…
The headlines following this year’s FIFA World Cup have understandably focused on the scale of the tournament. Recent industry reporting has highlighted the extraordinary levels of betting activity generated throughout the competition. Once the tournament is over, however, a different question emerges: what should operators be reviewing?
As a proud Welshman and former semi-professional footballer, football has always been one of my biggest passions. Wales had not appeared at a FIFA World Cup since 1958 and, by the time they qualified again in 2022, I was already in recovery from gambling addiction.
Before that, though, I never needed my own country to be involved. Like millions of others, the World Cup itself was enough. The tournament created weeks of football, hundreds of betting markets and a constant stream of opportunities to place another bet. Looking back now, I realize I wasn’t gambling because I supported a particular team. I was gambling because there was always another game, another market and another reason to convince myself the next bet would be different.
That, I think, is one of the biggest misconceptions about tournament betting. We often assume people bet because they have an emotional connection to a team. In reality, many don’t. They bet because major tournaments create an almost relentless sequence of opportunities over several weeks. Every fixture becomes another decision, another temptation and another moment where gambling can become more frequent and more intense.
Today, I work with gambling operators across the UK, Europe and North America, helping organizations strengthen customer protection through lived experience and evidence-informed customer interactions. Looking back at tournaments like the World Cup through that lens has fundamentally changed what we think success looks like.
The industry will rightly spend the coming weeks analyzing acquisition, turnover, customer engagement and operational performance. Those metrics matter and they should be scrutinized. What they don’t tell us is what happened during the thousands of conversations operators had with customers throughout the tournament, or whether those interactions achieved what they were intended to achieve.
Every major sporting event creates an enormous volume of customer interactions. Some are straightforward. Others involve customers displaying early signs of harm, affordability concerns, heightened emotional behavior or requests for support. Advisors are expected to make difficult judgements in real time, balancing commercial objectives with customer protection, often under considerable operational pressure.
Those conversations are among the most important moments an operator has with its customers, yet they are still too often reviewed through a single lens. Traditionally, quality assurance has focused on whether the correct process was followed. Were the right questions asked? Were procedures completed? Was the interaction compliant? Those questions remain essential, but they don’t always answer the question that matters most.
Did the interaction achieve what it was intended to achieve?
Compliance tells us whether the process was followed. It doesn’t always tell us whether the conversation genuinely connected with the person receiving it. An interaction can satisfy every policy requirement and still miss the opportunity to make a meaningful difference. Equally, some of the most effective conversations we’ve reviewed haven’t stood out because every box was ticked. They’ve stood out because an advisor demonstrated empathy, curiosity, sound judgement and the confidence to engage with another human being in a way that felt genuine.
One of the biggest lessons I’ve learned is that most advisors genuinely want to help. Customer interaction review shouldn’t exist to catch people out or create another compliance exercise. It should recognize excellent practice, identify opportunities for improvement and help organizations understand how their interactions are experienced by the people receiving them. That’s where lived experience adds something genuinely different. Not because it replaces operational expertise or compliance, but because it complements both by bringing the customer’s perspective into the review process.
As sporting events continue to grow in scale, so too does the responsibility carried by the people supporting customers throughout them. The commercial reports from this year’s World Cup will already have been written. The operational data will already have been analyzed. We believe the next review should focus on something just as important.
Not simply how much activity was generated, but how effectively organizations responded when customers needed them most.
If this year’s World Cup leaves one lasting legacy, we hope it’s a greater appreciation of the value already sitting within customer interactions. Every conversation has the potential to improve understanding, strengthen customer protection and enhance operational performance. Sometimes all that’s needed is another perspective to see it.
